Club Sadowsky!!!

[Joebone]

Up in post #359 I waxed raphsodic about my Metro R5-24...but I need to correct the record.

It turns out my fingerboard is Morado rather than Rosewood. I'd always figured morado was lighter in color than rosewood, but have learned this is not always the case. I took a close look at the texture of the surface, and it is very tight and smooth. Communication with the Sadowsky shop has now confirmed that this would be a morado.

Makes me wonder what one of these would sound like with rosewood...Chasarms' mahogany/brazilian rosewood 5-24 is really, really intriguing. But I am suspecting that that these Moderns can do a better job of aping old-school if ash/maple is not the wood combo.

 

[TonyP-]

why do we bug out over single coil hum when everyone has had to deal with guitar players using strats for forever?

I have to say that it does not bother me as well...(but my basses are shielded well).

I have singles in all my Js except my fretless and they only reason why it is not is because I picked it up that why and sound fine, so I did not bother changing it.

I'm on full up most of the time anyways.

 

[KJung]

i dont ever really use them like that. i usually treat the volumes as on/off switches and completely solo a pickup. even still, it has to be a terrible room for it to be super noticeable. and if its a problem for me, the guitar player is probably noisier when in pos 1 or 5 on a strat and high gain.

i dont think hendrix or srv switched to humcancelling pickups when soloing the neck or jaco when soloing the bridge or joe osborne soloing the neck pickup. all those recordings still sound pretty dang good!

That I couldn't do, especially since my modern sounding rigs with tweeters etc. are pretty unforgiving. However, I also treat the vol/vol or blend controls as pretty much 'on/off', but my 'off' is that 5% 'sweet spot' on the blend control or drop in one of the vol controls where you get 'almost solo'd but still relatively hum cancelling' performance from the singles.

And, to my ear, the very slightly fatter bridge pickup tone, and the very slightly more punchy and articulate neck pickup tone that you get with the other pickup just slightly on is a positive.

 

[Hans Gruber]

I just got my issue of Bass Player yesterday. Some nice Sadowsky-age in this particular issue. Ricky Minor cover has it. Tom Hamilton back has it. Greg Lake has one...I WANT ONE

 

[KJung]

Up in post #359 I waxed raphsodic about my Metro R5-24...but I need to correct the record.

It turns out my fingerboard is Morado rather than Rosewood. I'd always figured morado was lighter in color than rosewood, but have learned this is not always the case. I took a close look at the texture of the surface, and it is very tight and smooth. Communication with the Sadowsky shop has now confirmed that this would be a morado.

Makes me wonder what one of these would sound like with rosewood...Chasarms' mahogany/brazilian rosewood 5-24 is really, really intriguing. But I am suspecting that that these Moderns can do a better job of aping old-school if ash/maple is not the wood combo.

Very little 'old school' sound in any of the Moderns regardless of wood choice (other than a pretty good P tone with the neck pickup solo'd) IMO.

And you are correct, all of the Metro 'rosewood' spec's use PauFerro/Morado... great board!

 

[Tom7]

Well, I guess I'm full of crap then.....
To be honest, I could care less about the woods and/or the pick-ups because it has that Sadowsky thing going on.

Enter into 60's vs. 70's pick-up placement and yeah, now things get way obvious for me.

But in the end, just give me one that says Sadowsky on it.

Oh, let me add.....all the talk of these subtle differences really in three different rooms with the same bass, they IME are going to be shifted all over the map.

And sorry fella's, they really in the end are subtle.
I enjoy discussing it as much as anyone yeah. And I can say and do hear some differences, but as I stated about me SC's in my bass, they're aggressive yes, but I'm gonna give it a few gigs in different rooms as they might not be all that aggressive.

I don't suggest to romp blindly into anything, but at the same time, some things need to be called for what they are and it's not so massively significiant that it should push you out of something.
Traditionally speaking of JJ basses and "standard" ash, alder, maple & rosewood here to be clear.
Having Mahogny/Ebony with HC's vs ash/maple with SC's and all bets are off.

Not knowing Tom and/or his collection of basses, or his level of playing, I was being general. (not to suggest on any of those I'm any better or worse for the record. well maybe worse in # of basses owned- because I'm pathatic like that!).

No NO! Rats. I meant to respond directly to your post and got distracted and forgot.

You are definitely correct.

For example, one of the difficulties I have buying basses these days is my wife says she can't tell the difference between most of them, so why do I need to keep spending money on them.

And even when people can tell the difference, it is hard for many of us, including me, to determine which is "better." So I usually just try and shoot for a sound close to what is in my ear, or what was on the original recording I'm covering. Getting the sound that much closer pays a respect to the original artists and just adds something cooler to doing it I think.

In other words, I think you were spot on in your advice, based on what you knew about me at that time.

However, since I'm looking for tonal (and visual and playability) nuances, instead of just a solid j-style bass, and Vic knew that, he spoke up and I agreed.

One if the reasons I watch the tonight show is Ricky Minor. I don't know how many Sadowskys that guy has, but it is more than one and I'm guessing he has more than one so that he can have those more subtle variations on the Sadowsky sound as well.

Anyway, sorry for leaving you out to dry like that. I didn't mean to.

 

[Tom7]

why do we bug out over single coil hum when everyone has had to deal with guitar players using strats for forever?

Laughing! +1 and here here! (Hear hear?)

 

[Tom7]

... If I understand correctly what I've been reading while lurking here, and I'm looking for you guys to correct me if I'm wrong...

The combination of ash + maple + 60s placed SCs on an NYC would be an excellent Yang to the Yin of my ash + maple + 60s HC soapbars of my BN5.

This NYC combination should be a thick, aggressive Fendery sound, while my BN5 would be the smooth "campaign" style Fendery sound. That range and variety appeals to me because while sonically they may be in the same Fendery sound family, they also would be as different in that family as Conrad and Paris Hilton are.

These basses, in context with my alder and rosewood Fbass VF5, and alder and rosewood Alleva Coppolo custom, and (of course) my 1976 ash and maple Fender Jazz bass, leave me with the perception (illusion?) that I would have a nice set of options when I'm looking for that specific Fender sound in my ear, whatever it may be.

Hopefully some of you guys who are familiar with Fs, ACs and Sadowskys can take a quick moment to either confirm or adjust my perception of this ash & maple NYC for me please. Cheers.

 

[tombowlus]

Well, I guess I'm full of crap then.....To be honest

+1 We know, but we love you anyway. Okay, so maybe we don't love you, but we don't hate you. Okay, so maybe some of us hate you (looks West, towards Illinois... ), but the rest of us... hmmm... Well, I guess I see a decent amount of tolerance directed towards you. Or at least an absence of hate (again, for most of us).

 

[narud]

Hopefully some of you guys who are familiar with Fs, ACs and Sadowskys can take a quick moment to either confirm or adjust my perception of this ash & maple NYC for me please. Cheers.

the singles in the sad will be grindier and more upper mid/low treble present than your f bass or 76 jazz.

 

[MikeBass]

+1 We know, but we love you anyway. Okay, so maybe we don't love you, but we don't hate you. Okay, so maybe some of us hate you (looks West, towards Illinois... ), but the rest of us... hmmm... Well, I guess I see a decent amount of tolerance directed towards you. Or at least an absence of hate (again, for most of us).

At this point in my life Tom, I'll take some part of that as good (??).

I think...

I know I can come off as a little "know-y", and I really don't mean to.
Maybe it's just as I get older (oh lord!) I don't care as much about the minor nuances as much as I do about a "bigger collection".
I know that it's all the stack-up of the little things, but at some point when we're dealing with basses on this level, those little things, as much as they are more pronounced and make a difference more-so than over a MIA Fender for example, they also don't matter as much, because it's the whole thing that sounds good.

For me, when I pick up a bass, the last thing I do is look at it spec wise.
My current Sadowsky (which I REALLY would like to be my last- but we know how that usually works! LOL!) I didn't even care what woods or pick-ups it had.
As long as it was sitting in the "traditional" catagory that is.

Alder/rosewood, ash/maple HC's or SC's, I didn't care because I knew that it would sound great and I knew that it would have that "Sadowsky" thingy going on.

I guess that was my point really.

Now, if I ordered a new one, yeah, I kinda know what I might do, but to be honest, I would really just buy one from what they have available as opposed to waiting.

I've been partial to ash/rosewood with HC's in the last few that really stood out for me (usually I would do alder/rosewood), so if I custom ordered, I would more than likely do that.

So yeah, it does matter to me, but in the end make it a REALLY good sounding "Jazz Bass".

 

[MikeBass]

The combination of ash + maple + 60s placed SCs on an NYC would be an excellent Yang to the Yin of my ash + maple + 60s HC soapbars of my BN5.

Hopefully some of you guys who are familiar with Fs, ACs and Sadowskys can take a quick moment to either confirm or adjust my perception of this ash & maple NYC for me please. Cheers.

Yes.
But IMO after owning an ash/maple BN5 the difference will be more very close to the coil tap on the BN5. Maybe a bit more in the upper mids on the Sad SC's.
A HC "tapped" never IMO sounds completely like a SC. Close, but never fully SC sounding.

So imagine you BN5 in SC mode, but with even more of that SC mid grind.

 

[KJung]

+1 to Narud's and Mikebass's post per Tom7's question.

The 60's position singles in an ash/maple Sadowsky (I have lots of clips up of that one!) will not be that Fendery (that really isn't a classic Fender spec, and the Sadowsky singles seem to be wound 'hotter and more aggressive' than many Fender pickups), but will be very grindy and 'in your face'. That combination of ash/maple, those aggressive Sadowsky singles, and putting that bridge pickup in 60's position, gives you a very growly AND grindy sort of tone. I love it.

As you know, the A-C's are more 'classic ash/maple in 70's position' and sound quite a bit more Fendery and 'classic' to my ear.

I describe the BN5 as 'jazz on satin', which is kind of what the other guys (and you) are saying. Even in single coil mode, the tone is refinded, smooth, and not particularly aggressive... nice in its own way! I found the FBass VF ash/maple much closer to my A-C though... if anything, even more 'classic Fendery' sounding.

IMO and IME.

 

[tombowlus]

At this point in my life Tom, I'll take some part of that as good (??).

I think...

I know I can come off as a little "know-y", and I really don't mean to.
Maybe it's just as I get older (oh lord!) I don't care as much about the minor nuances as much as I do about a "bigger collection".
I know that it's all the stack-up of the little things, but at some point when we're dealing with basses on this level, those little things, as much as they are more pronounced and make a difference more-so than over a MIA Fender for example, they also don't matter as much, because it's the whole thing that sounds good.

For me, when I pick up a bass, the last thing I do is look at it spec wise.
My current Sadowsky (which I REALLY would like to be my last- but we know how that usually works! LOL!) I didn't even care what woods or pick-ups it had.
As long as it was sitting in the "traditional" catagory that is.

Alder/rosewood, ash/maple HC's or SC's, I didn't care because I knew that it would sound great and I knew that it would have that "Sadowsky" thingy going on.

I guess that was my point really.

Now, if I ordered a new one, yeah, I kinda know what I might do, but to be honest, I would really just buy one from what they have available as opposed to waiting.

I've been partial to ash/rosewood with HC's in the last few that really stood out for me (usually I would do alder/rosewood), so if I custom ordered, I would more than likely do that.

So yeah, it does matter to me, but in the end make it a REALLY good sounding "Jazz Bass".

I hear you, Mike, and I tend to agree with you to a large extent. I can see Vic's point about reveling in the differences which the woods, pickups, and electronics bring to the table - especially when it's on an instrument format that the player knows very well. But your comments are fairly similar to what Will Lee was saying in my interview with him when I tried to get him to tell me his favorite woods/spec for his Sadowsky's.

Bottom line is, as long as you're getting one of Roger's basses, you are all set.

 

[MikeBass]

I hear you, Mike, and I tend to agree with you to a large extent. I can see Vic's point about reveling in the differences which the woods, pickups, and electronics bring to the table - especially when it's on an instrument format that the player knows very well. But your comments are fairly similar to what Will Lee was saying in my interview with him when I tried to get him to tell me his favorite woods/spec for his Sadowsky's.Bottom line is, as long as you're getting one of Roger's basses, you are all set.

See, great minds think a like!

(well, not really, I just don't care as much anymore! LOL!)

 

[Chasarms]

. . . Makes me wonder what one of these would sound like with rosewood. . . Chasarms' mahogany/brazilian rosewood 5-24 is really, really intriguing. . .

Actually, I would not expect there to be significant differences in the Alder/Morado and the Mahogany/BrRW. I actually have those two FBs on my two basses. The BrRW is a little smoother feeling and a little "slicker," (and prettier ) but they are similar in hardness and general nature, I believe. The BrRW is not at all similar in feel to the rosewood you find on many other instruments. I believe that is Indian Rosewood which is noticeably softer and has almost a spongy feel to it.

I don't have any experience with a mahogany body outside of this bass. It's the only one I have ever had. But, IMO, it shares a general nature like the many Alder basses I have owned. Certainly more similar to those than an ash bass.

Of course take of this with the caveat that the Sadowsky Modern is a VERY unique animal. So, to compare it with anything else I may have owned is fraught with peril from the start.

 

[Vic]

If I understand correctly...

The combination of ash + maple + 60s placed SCs on an NYC would be an excellent Yang to the Yin of my ash + maple + 60s HC soapbars of my BN5...

...my alder and rosewood Fbass VF5, and alder and rosewood Alleva Coppolo custom, and (of course) my 1976 ash and maple Fender Jazz bass, leave me .... a nice set of options when I'm looking for that specific Fender sound in my ear, whatever it may be.

Yes, I think you've chosen wisely.

I also have alder/rosewood VF and AC basses, and very well remember the BN5 I had, and the ash/maple/SC Sadowsky would (IMHO) do the most to expand your "Fender-ish" universe. Plus, unless I miss my guess, I just think that combo would appeal to you most anyway. Ultimately tho, you'll just have to tell me if I'm right... after you get and gig one.

 

[Vic]

Well, I guess I'm full of crap then...

For the record, I never said, and never meant to imply that, either (even tho I do like to give you crap sometimes ). I just think some of the things that maybe aren't as big on your radar (which is FINE), would be on his (which should also be fine.)

 

[Vic]

On the SC thing, while I tend to defend the folks that prefer HC's, considering their hum canceling to be a significant enough benefit to be selection criteria, I HAVE come to terms with SC hum for the vast majority of the places I play, and do prefer their sound enough to make a little bit of hum worth it to me. That wasn't always the case, but it is now.

FWIW.

 

[KJung]

On the SC thing, while I tend to defend the folks that prefer HC's, considering their hum canceling to be a significant enough benefit to be selection criteria, I HAVE come to terms with SC hum for the vast majority of the places I play, and do prefer their sound enough to make a little bit of hum worth it to me. That wasn't always the case, but it is now.

FWIW.

I get literally no more hum than with the HC's I had, but again, I don't solo either pickup 100% If you don't do that, literally zero issue, and interestingly, with both SC's dimed, I find them just a smidge less noisy than the HC's, probably due to the slightly less extended top end.